We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
ATKIS und terrestrische Biotopkartierung – ein Vergleich von Kleinstrukturen und Nutzfl ächen beider Methoden in der Agrarlandschaft.
- Authors
Hoffmann, Jörg; Lodenkemper, Ricarda
- Abstract
Precise knowledge of agricultural areas and small structures in the agricultural landscape is important for utilisation and nature conservation. Both the Official Topographic-Cartographic Information System (ATKIS) and terrestrial biotope mapping can provide information on this. ATKIS data is essentially collected remotely. In contrast, biotope mapping is a terrestrial method. Since ATKIS data is available nationwide, it is analysed for agricultural purposes, e.g. to determine small structures. Terrestrial biotope mapping data is only available to a limited extent nationwide. However, it does provide detailed information on utilised areas and small structures in the landscape. The aim was to compare the data from both methods in a reference area in relation to the utilised areas (arable land, grassland) and small structures in the agricultural landscape. To this end, terrestrial biotope mapping and data digitisation was carried out in six landscapes, each covering 4 km², in the federal state of Brandenburg. The agricultural landscape was identified and a comparison of the utilised areas and small structures was carried out using both methods (biotope mapping versus ATKIS). This was carried out in relation to four ATKIS variants (V1, V2.1, V2.2, V3), in which the ATKIS data was successively qualified from V1 to V3. Compared to the biotope mapping, ATKIS showed a similar proportion of arable land in all variants (V1 to V3) of -0.3% to +0.1% to the terrestrial biotope mapping. The balance of grassland areas differed considerably. Grassland areas were strongly overestimated by ATKIS (V1: +51.4% to V3: +51.9%), partly because special arable land uses such as fallow land were interpreted as grassland areas. The area of small structures was strongly underestimated in all variants in ATKIS, with only 41.4% in V1 to 66.1% in V3 of the biotope mapping. All six individual areas showed the same situation. The degree of coverage of internal components of small structures by ATKIS varied greatly. Only 45.4% (V1) to 62.6% (V3) of the copses were recorded by the ATKIS data, while the small bodies of water were greatly underestimated, with 45.1% at V1 to 64.8% at V3 of the terrestrial survey. The proportion of built-up areas was clearly overestimated with ATKIS. Small structures that were not recognised and not documented in ATKIS compared to terrestrial biotope mapping, including small bodies of water (swamps, ponds <1,000 m²), small or narrow copses and grassy-herbaceous fringing meadows with scattered shrubs, were documented using photos and explanations as examples. The results for all 6 landscapes indicate that the ATKIS-Basis-DLM significantly underestimates the quantity of small structures surveyed according to biotope mapping in all variants (V2.1 to V3) (by at least 33.9% on average in V3). According to the current state of knowledge of this study, terrestrial biotope mapping is necessary in order to be able to more realistically determine the qualitative and quantitative habitat features in agricultural landscapes and to derive recommendations for landscape ecology issues and regulatory requirements. In order to be able to integrate the potential of terrestrial mapping for Germany-wide issues, sample areas should be developed and terrestrially mapped so that the results, e.g. the quantitative underestimation of small structures, can be taken into account.
- Subjects
BRANDENBURG (Germany); GERMANY; LANDSCAPE ecology; ARABLE land; BODIES of water; NATURE conservation; AGRICULTURE; AGRICULTURAL landscape management
- Publication
Berichte aus dem Julius Kühn-Institut, 2024, Issue 226, p1
- ISSN
1866-590X
- Publication type
Article